Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 32

Thread: Depth of field and focal plane

  1. #1

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Litchfield Park, AZ
    Posts
    31

    Depth of field and focal plane

    I have been reading A User's Guide To The View Camera by Jim Stone, which seems very detailed, informative and well written. So far I have grasped the operation and set-up of the camera but am still struggling with depth of field as it relates to movements of the front and rear standards. HERE is a link to a large photo I really love and wonder how it was done. I especially like the front to back sharp focus and pose, and wonder if this was done at a smaller aperture to achieve the effect, or if movements were also needed. Another example is THIS photo that I also like that has a different and much shorter depth of field. Is this done without movements and a wide aperture alone? Thanks for any insight.

    Alex

  2. #2

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Montara, California
    Posts
    1,827

    Re: Depth of field and focal plane

    Funny, I was just showing my kids how this worked on my new camera. Notice that in the photo the tree on the right is blurry. That's odd considering it is no so far away. An additional clue is that the distant mountains on the right are blurry while those on the left are sharp--they are the same distance from the camera.

    So it looks like movements were used. But which ones? The common front tilt doesn't seem right since that would make things in focus from near to far. In your shot it appears the focus plane runs from near-right to far-left, sort of diagonally through the picture depth.

    Hmmmm (Always best to reason these things our on your own...)

    --Darin

  3. #3
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    6,737

    Re: Depth of field and focal plane

    Do you have a veiw camera yet? A lot of those things are more quickly learned by 'doing' than memorizing.

    The focal plane orientation for the golfers was obtained by swinging the lensboard counterclockwise when looking at it from above. (or swinging the rear the opposite way).

    The film plane, lens plane and line of the golfers all met in a single line as per the Scheimpflug principle, but its easiest to just swing until you get the effect you want on the ground glass.

    In the golfer picture Dof is pretty shallow even in the sun with fill lighting, so I'm guessing its a print from an 8x10 negative.

    In that second link they were trying that selective focus thing by tilting the lens up.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Westminster, MD
    Posts
    1,653

    Re: Depth of field and focal plane

    Clearly by swinging the front standard of the camera the photographer got all the golfers sharp, but the photographer still didn't have the young ladies place their golfballs in the correct location. HA!

    The other image simply has shallow depth of field do to a wide aperture.

    Best to set up your camera and move the standards around to see what their movement changes the image.
    When I grow up, I want to be a photographer.

    http://www.walterpcalahan.com/Photography/index.html

  5. #5
    Preston Birdwell
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Columbia, CA
    Posts
    1,587

    Re: Depth of field and focal plane

    Alex,

    There is a nice book The View Camera: Operations and Techniques by Harvey Shaman. Amphoto. Garden City, New York. ISBN: 0-8174-0598-4. August 1977.

    The book covers all aspects of view camera operation. It has many illustrations that show the relation between the subject and the camera's configuration to achieve specific results.

    I used this book when I first started using a view camera, and, using my own still life setup, followed along. The effort was well worth it.

    I don't know if the book is still available, but a Gooogle search may turn up something.

    --P
    Preston-Columbia CA

    "If you want nice fresh oats, you have to pay a fair price. If you can be satisfied with oats that have already been through the horse; that comes a little cheaper."

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Livermore, CA
    Posts
    111

    Re: Depth of field and focal plane

    Alex,

    IMHO, the first is a clear and classic example of swing. This could have quite possibly be even shot with a very wide aperture. I think the far trees on the right are a considerable distance further than the trees on the left. Then again, I'm not there to measure... :-)

    the second image is simply a wide open image, shallow depth of field as others have mentioned.

    Movements and aperture play key roles in your desired effect and these are good examples.

    Man, I don't care if those golf balls are misplaced, those golfers are hot! :-)

    Lon

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Livermore, CA
    Posts
    111

    Re: Depth of field and focal plane

    Oh, forgot to mention... this is clearly a digital mock-up. There's a big sensor dust bunny in the sky the photographer failed to clean up in post processing. :-)

  8. #8

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Montara, California
    Posts
    1,827

    Re: Depth of field and focal plane

    Quote Originally Posted by Lon Overacker View Post
    Oh, forgot to mention... this is clearly a digital mock-up. There's a big sensor dust bunny in the sky the photographer failed to clean up in post processing. :-)
    You know the more i look at it the odder it looks. The far golfers have blurry feet but preternaturally sharp heads...hmmmmm.

    --Darin

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,219

    Re: Depth of field and focal plane

    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    ...

    The focal plane orientation for the golfers was obtained by swinging the lensboard counterclockwise when looking at it from above. (or swinging the rear the opposite way).

    The film plane, lens plane and line of the golfers all met in a single line as per the Scheimpflug principle, but its easiest to just swing until you get the effect you want on the ground glass.
    ....

    .
    Hmmm

    The subject plane seems to me to be intersecting the image plane to the right of the lens. According to the Scheimpflug Principle, the lens plane must have been swung so that it too intersected those planes in the same line. Unless I have my directions all screwed up, that seems to say the lens plane was swung clockwise when looked at from above, or, as you say the rear standard was swung in the opposite direction.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Litchfield Park, AZ
    Posts
    31

    Re: Depth of field and focal plane

    Quote Originally Posted by Darin Boville View Post
    Funny, I was just showing my kids how this worked on my new camera. Notice that in the photo the tree on the right is blurry. That's odd considering it is no so far away. An additional clue is that the distant mountains on the right are blurry while those on the left are sharp--they are the same distance from the camera.

    So it looks like movements were used. But which ones? The common front tilt doesn't seem right since that would make things in focus from near to far. In your shot it appears the focus plane runs from near-right to far-left, sort of diagonally through the picture depth.

    Hmmmm (Always best to reason these things our on your own...)

    --Darin
    Thanks Darin!

    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    Do you have a veiw camera yet? A lot of those things are more quickly learned by 'doing' than memorizing.

    The focal plane orientation for the golfers was obtained by swinging the lensboard counterclockwise when looking at it from above. (or swinging the rear the opposite way).

    The film plane, lens plane and line of the golfers all met in a single line as per the Scheimpflug principle, but its easiest to just swing until you get the effect you want on the ground glass.

    In the golfer picture Dof is pretty shallow even in the sun with fill lighting, so I'm guessing its a print from an 8x10 negative.

    In that second link they were trying that selective focus thing by tilting the lens up.
    Thanks ic, I am still in the planning process to buy my first LF camera and while some of this is quite obvious to someone with a little experience, it is not so for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Walter Calahan View Post
    Clearly by swinging the front standard of the camera the photographer got all the golfers sharp, but the photographer still didn't have the young ladies place their golfballs in the correct location. HA!

    The other image simply has shallow depth of field do to a wide aperture.

    Best to set up your camera and move the standards around to see what their movement changes the image.
    Quote Originally Posted by Preston View Post
    Alex,

    There is a nice book The View Camera: Operations and Techniques by Harvey Shaman. Amphoto. Garden City, New York. ISBN: 0-8174-0598-4. August 1977.

    The book covers all aspects of view camera operation. It has many illustrations that show the relation between the subject and the camera's configuration to achieve specific results.

    I used this book when I first started using a view camera, and, using my own still life setup, followed along. The effort was well worth it.

    I don't know if the book is still available, but a Gooogle search may turn up something.

    --P
    Just ordered the book off Amazon, thanks for the tip!

    Quote Originally Posted by Lon Overacker View Post
    Alex,

    IMHO, the first is a clear and classic example of swing. This could have quite possibly be even shot with a very wide aperture. I think the far trees on the right are a considerable distance further than the trees on the left. Then again, I'm not there to measure... :-)

    the second image is simply a wide open image, shallow depth of field as others have mentioned.

    Movements and aperture play key roles in your desired effect and these are good examples.

    Man, I don't care if those golf balls are misplaced, those golfers are hot! :-)

    Lon
    Ya the girl in the front is especially hot, and I like this picture so much it is now my desktop image lol!

    Quote Originally Posted by Lon Overacker View Post
    Oh, forgot to mention... this is clearly a digital mock-up. There's a big sensor dust bunny in the sky the photographer failed to clean up in post processing. :-)
    Quote Originally Posted by Darin Boville View Post
    You know the more i look at it the odder it looks. The far golfers have blurry feet but preternaturally sharp heads...hmmmmm.

    --Darin
    Quote Originally Posted by Leonard Evens View Post
    Hmmm

    The subject plane seems to me to be intersecting the image plane to the right of the lens. According to the Scheimpflug Principle, the lens plane must have been swung so that it too intersected those planes in the same line. Unless I have my directions all screwed up, that seems to say the lens plane was swung clockwise when looked at from above, or, as you say the rear standard was swung in the opposite direction.
    Hmmmm...

Similar Threads

  1. To owners of 600mm Fujinon C lens
    By Marco Annaratone in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 30-Apr-2021, 12:28
  2. DOF question
    By Joe_1422 in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 23-Jan-2012, 16:43
  3. Depth of Field, Depth of Focus, and Film Flatness
    By steve simmons in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 7-Jan-2006, 19:30
  4. Interesting info on DOF etc
    By ADG in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2-Dec-2004, 08:10
  5. Diffraction and Lens Flare
    By Paul Mongillo in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-Mar-2000, 13:57

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •